Mueller Report

It seems from the reports coming out that Mueller's conclusion on obstruction (as opposed to Barr's spin) was that Trump tried to obstruct justice, including getting rid of Mueller, but people refused to follow out his orders so justice wasn't obstructed.

Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer

ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

Even the unredacted stuff (corroborating and fleshing out much of what has been reported by WaPo, NYT, WSJ etc) is damning—you don't have to be successful in your attempts to obstruct justice in order to violate the law (although it should be noted that several witnesses & subjects did indeed act to impede the investigation by eg. destroying communications and lying to investigators), and repeatedly encouraging your underlings to break the law would've been regarded as an impeachable act, were the US not currently a banana republic. Also clear Mueller—guided by DoJ policy—declined to pursue the investigation in a manner that might lead to a finding of criminal conduct on Trump's part, which directly contradicts Barr's statements about that question. Imperative that congress & the public be informed of the counterintelligence aspects of the investigation, and that congressmen at least get to read the full report. If not, it's fair to say that Trump, with the help of Republican legislators and operatives, will have gotten away with obstruction of justice—and one of the republic's most important safeguards will have been nullified.

“Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
— Bill Gates

(I heard parts of the referenced Michael Lewis podcast. Good analysis of how rules and norms have changed in our bifurcated/polarized society, from sports to financials to politics. Can add college admissions to the list now, too.)

The corruption is astounding but not surprising. We've become a culture that celebrates fame and fortune; we look the other way when the rich and powerful break the rules (or bend the laws) that everyone else is supposed to follow. Hell, we elected a president whose entire life was built on lies and exploiting legal loopholes, but he was good at manipulating media to create an image. He didn't just dupe the GOP and the voter, but found a bunch of like-minded sycophants to surround and enable him.

Now it's up to congress...but the political calendar is too short for impeachment hearings (which is the only real process left to flush out the truth). I don't hear anything from the Trump administration about a 9/11 type commission aimed at the foreign interference in our elections, or anything about how to beef up cyber security, or instill faith that our next elections won't be tainted by bots and trolls on social media.

You want us to read the lines where he outright tells Sessions it was his job as AG to protect Trump from special council investigations? I think we've read them, Lewk.

I think if you compare the articles of impeachment they got Nixon with, they could get Trump on every single one except bombing Cambodia if there were such a thing as principled Republic in Congress, or if the Dems had a spine.

Even on collusion, the report is far from an exoneration: we have Manafort sharing polling data with a Russian operative, we have DJR and Kushner meeting with a Russian to get dirt on Clinton, we have the Trump campaign and Trump himself aware of the impending Wikileaks e-mail dump and coordinating his campaign strategy around it, and so on and so on. Mueller wasn't able to get enough evidence to rise to the level of criminal conspiracy, but the report also points out that a lot of evidence was unavailable to him, or he was obstructed by witnesses lying, deleting emails, using encrypted chat programs etc.

In a normal political environment, the report would have been devastating, but sadly we're not in one.

Sticks and stones take a toll on me but they aren't your strongest weaponryYou can take your shots but you'd best prepare, I can see smoke rising in the airEvery move has a counteract, to turn the tides with a planned attackYou push me down and the rest will rise but first I'm singing a battle cry

You want us to read the lines where he outright tells Sessions it was his job as AG to protect Trump from special council investigations? I think we've read them, Lewk.

I think if you compare the articles of impeachment they got Nixon with, they could get Trump on every single one except bombing Cambodia if there were such a thing as principled Republic in Congress, or if the Dems had a spine.

Even on collusion, the report is far from an exoneration: we have Manafort sharing polling data with a Russian operative, we have DJR and Kushner meeting with a Russian to get dirt on Clinton, we have the Trump campaign and Trump himself aware of the impending Wikileaks e-mail dump and coordinating his campaign strategy around it, and so on and so on. Mueller wasn't able to get enough evidence to rise to the level of criminal conspiracy, but the report also points out that a lot of evidence was unavailable to him, or he was obstructed by witnesses lying, deleting emails, using encrypted chat programs etc.

In a normal political environment, the report would have been devastating, but sadly we're not in one.

You are joking right? Bill Clinton's impeachment set t he precedence that politicians don't need to vote based on what happened, they just do it on politics. There is 0 doubt that Clinton lied under oath and yet he's found innocent by the senate.

It's crazy how Democrats are so often the first to do something and then get all pissy when Republicans do it. Reid goes nuclear and that's fine but then Republicans do it, it is some sort of evil travesty.

You are joking right? Bill Clinton's impeachment set t he precedence that politicians don't need to vote based on what happened, they just do it on politics. There is 0 doubt that Clinton lied under oath and yet he's found innocent by the senate.

It's crazy how Democrats are so often the first to do something and then get all pissy when Republicans do it. Reid goes nuclear and that's fine but then Republicans do it, it is some sort of evil travesty.

Sorry, what part of that are you objecting to? The part where I said republicans in congress had no principles?

Sticks and stones take a toll on me but they aren't your strongest weaponryYou can take your shots but you'd best prepare, I can see smoke rising in the airEvery move has a counteract, to turn the tides with a planned attackYou push me down and the rest will rise but first I'm singing a battle cry

Although if the Democrats do decline to impeach when the evidence of wrong doing by Trump is this clear because they think it's a bad strategy for 2020, they're no better than the Republicans.

Sticks and stones take a toll on me but they aren't your strongest weaponryYou can take your shots but you'd best prepare, I can see smoke rising in the airEvery move has a counteract, to turn the tides with a planned attackYou push me down and the rest will rise but first I'm singing a battle cry

Corney's briefing included the Steele reporting's unverified allegation that the Russians had compromising tapes of the President involving
conduct when he was a private citizen during a 2013 trip to Moscow for the Miss Universe Pageant. During
the 2016 presidential campaign, a similar claim may have reached candidate Trump. On October 30, 20 I 6,
Michael Cohen received a text from Russian businessman Giorgi Rtskhiladze that said, "Stopped flow of
tapes from Russia but not sure if there's anything else. Just so you know .... " 10/30/16 Text Message ,
Rtskhiladze to Cohen. Rtskhiladze said "tapes " referred to compromising tapes of Trump rumored to be
held by persons associated with the Russian real estate conglomerate Crocus Group, which had helped host
the 2013 Miss Universe Pageant in Russia . Rtskhilad ze 4/4/ l 8 302 , at 12. Coh en said he spoke to Trump
about the issue after receiving the texts from Rtskhilad ze. Cohen 9/ 12/ 18 302, at 13. Rtskhiladz e said he
was told the tapes were fake, but he did not communicate that to Cohen .

Sticks and stones take a toll on me but they aren't your strongest weaponryYou can take your shots but you'd best prepare, I can see smoke rising in the airEvery move has a counteract, to turn the tides with a planned attackYou push me down and the rest will rise but first I'm singing a battle cry

It's all just a messaging game for Trump and his toadies; flood the zone with memes to create doubt, distract, deny. When the mainstream media covers Trump's Twittering, which they're obliged to do, it can perpetuate Trump's chosen words (like "collusion). And he took advantage of the information void since the Mueller team was disciplined and didn't leak.

The report WAS devastating because it outlined Trump's several attempts to obstruct justice and did NOT totally exonerate him. (Apparently even the AG is willing to lie to the public, another devastating revelation.) It's made worse that the Russian hacking/interference isn't taken seriously because Trump believes Putin over our own intelligence agencies....and cyber security for our next election remains vulnerable.

I don't know if that's more obstruction of justice, or more abuse of power, or an abdication of his presidential oath....but they're all impeachable offenses. He's also violating the Emoluments Clause, but that court case is pending. The problem is that the Senate Republicans will never vote to impeach, let alone censure. And the process takes so long it wouldn't be completed before the 2020 election anyway.

Mueller apparently thinks Barr 'misrepresented' his report and created public confusion, undermining trust in the process. Duh.

I want to know if this means the AG is obstructing justice? And how would we know, if all congressional subpoenas are simply ignored?

"When Barr pressed Mueller on whether he thought Barr’s memo to Congress was inaccurate, Mueller said he did not but felt that the media coverage of it was misinterpreting the investigation, officials said."

"When Barr pressed Mueller on whether he thought Barr’s memo to Congress was inaccurate, Mueller said he did not but felt that the media coverage of it was misinterpreting the investigation, officials said."

Nice try, but it's clear from context that Mueller was primarily objecting to Barr's actions, which were directly responsible for the inaccurate "media" coverage. It's also clear from Barr's hearing that he was and still is attempting to deceive both congress and the public—with the help of Trump's geriatric core of gutless water-carriers.

“Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
— Bill Gates

It is especially hilarious to see you expecting people to believe Barr's uncorroborated account of what Mueller said or believed, given that we have already seen how willing he is to dissemble over precisely those things

“Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
— Bill Gates

"When Barr pressed Mueller on whether he thought Barr’s memo to Congress was inaccurate, Mueller said he did not but felt that the media coverage of it was misinterpreting the investigation, officials said."

So. . . according to Barr's spokespeople, Barr asked Mueller whether Mueller was directly accusing him of lying to Congress and these spokespeople insist that Mueller said "of course not, you're the Attorney General of the US, you'd never do that"?

Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

Barr has now wussed out of testifying before congress because he's afraid of being questions by professional attorneys.

This is generally a sign of someone being completely on the level, obviously.

Sticks and stones take a toll on me but they aren't your strongest weaponryYou can take your shots but you'd best prepare, I can see smoke rising in the airEvery move has a counteract, to turn the tides with a planned attackYou push me down and the rest will rise but first I'm singing a battle cry

So. . . according to Barr's spokespeople, Barr asked Mueller whether Mueller was directly accusing him of lying to Congress and these spokespeople insist that Mueller said "of course not, you're the Attorney General of the US, you'd never do that"?

Wouldn't that be something that could be easily refuted by Mueller who will be testifying before Congress in a matter of days, or for that matter, who could pretty easily send a note off to the press? I'm not sure I see the benefit in misrepresenting that so publicly - it's not as though Mueller isn't going to be directly asked about it.

Barr tried to deceive the public about the report hours before the redacted report was released. Truth doesn't matter, accountability is non-existent.

IANAL, but even accepting at face value that Barr did try to deceive the public about the report, there is a clear difference between a press conference and lying in congressional testimony while under oath.

I'm not sure I see the benefit in misrepresenting that so publicly - it's not as though Mueller isn't going to be directly asked about it.

It's all about muddying the waters and creating ambiguity, thus making future flat denials that they did the thing that did easier. The same reason his testimony before the senate was so evasive and focused on semantics.

Given that we're talking about a private conversation in this instance*, he can easily fall back on 'different recollections' or whatever.

*Never-mind that Mueller's letter was crystal clear as to what his objection was: You did not release the lovingly crafted summaries we prepared for public consumption and instead released a summary letter of your own which did not accurate represent what the report actually said, Another way of creating ambiguity.

Last edited by Steely Glint; 05-02-2019 at 09:43 PM.

Sticks and stones take a toll on me but they aren't your strongest weaponryYou can take your shots but you'd best prepare, I can see smoke rising in the airEvery move has a counteract, to turn the tides with a planned attackYou push me down and the rest will rise but first I'm singing a battle cry

IANAL, but even accepting at face value that Barr did try to deceive the public about the report, there is a clear difference between a press conference and lying in congressional testimony while under oath.

The point is that Barr may not be above trying to deceive the public or congress about things that can be reasonably expected to be made clear in the near future, especially not when he can also expect to evade punishment. It is evident from Barr's statements that he did indeed attempt to deceive the public, eg. wrt Mueller's reasons for not charging Trump with a crime.

“Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
— Bill Gates

It's all about muddying the waters and creating ambiguity, thus making future flat denials that they did the thing that did easier. The same reason his testimony before the senate was so evasive and focused on semantics.

Given that we're talking about a private conversation in this instance*, he can easily fall back on 'different recollections' or whatever.

*Never-mind that Mueller's letter was crystal clear as to what his objection was: You did not release the lovingly crafted summaries we prepared for public consumption and instead released a summary letter of your own which did not accurate represent what the report actually said, Another way of creating ambiguity.

Eh, that just doesn't seem convincing to me. Barr already admitted there were other people in the room, that Mueller was on speaker phone, and the conversation was memorandized by someone in his staff - all of which could be subpoenaed (not sure where this would fall under Executive privilege, Fuzzy would probably have a better idea). It's also equally possible that Mueller has a recording (or written record) of the call, or had other witnesses present when it happened. Again, lying to Congress while under oath is a crime - and Barr would have to be incredibly stupid to do so given the above.

I'm not saying it is impossible, just that it stretches the bounds of credulity for someone with Barr's credentials.

Sticks and stones take a toll on me but they aren't your strongest weaponryYou can take your shots but you'd best prepare, I can see smoke rising in the airEvery move has a counteract, to turn the tides with a planned attackYou push me down and the rest will rise but first I'm singing a battle cry

Nice try, but it's clear from context that Mueller was primarily objecting to Barr's actions, which were directly responsible for the inaccurate "media" coverage. It's also clear from Barr's hearing that he was and still is attempting to deceive both congress and the public—with the help of Trump's geriatric core of gutless water-carriers.

Amusingly enough the conversation is now about Barr and if he misstated something in part of his summary as opposed to weather or not Trump actually colluded with Russia. Pretty clear we've moved past the whole Russia Hoax narrative.

Democrats can't depend on impeachment (was unlikely to happen in the first place) they'll have to win at the ballot box. Florida allowing felons to vote will help them there but we'll see how the Dem primary goes. It will be especially bruising in all likelihood and if the economy remains strong we might just get to see the epic REEEEEEEing of a Trump re-election.